>>AMD CPUs OTOH run significantly higher power than their spec'd TDP right out-of-the box. For example, that "105 W" 3900X actually ships with a power limit of 142 W and it is quite capable of sustaining that under an all-core load.
I'm pretty sure you've got that exactly reversed, AMD's power draw tends to stay closer to the rated TDP than Intel's.
>>The outrage over Intel CPU's power consumption is pretty silly when you realize that the only reason AMD CPUs don't draw just as much is because their chips would explode if you tried to pump that much power into them. If you care about power consumption just set your power limits as desired and Intel CPUs will deliver perfectly reasonable power efficiency and performance.
I'm not even sure what this means. AMD CPUs are on a more advanced and physically smaller process, with smaller wires, and a different voltage-frequency-response curve. Of course they would "explode" if you try to pump them with voltages that the process isn't designed to operate with, that the Intel CPU with it's larger process can handle. But the power draw isn't really the "point" of the CPU -- performance is.
Imagine thinking that the Pentium 4 or Bulldozer was better than their contemporaries because they were capable of drawing incredible amounts of power.
> I'm pretty sure you've got that exactly reversed, AMD's power draw tends to stay closer to the rated TDP than Intel's.
I was talking about the CPUs in their factory default configuration. Intel CPUs default to limiting their sustained power draw to exactly their TDP, AMD CPUs meanwhile run significantly higher.
Where Intel CPUs will draw more is when you disable the power limits, but that power buys you extra frequency over what AMD is capable of.
> That's like complaining that speaker wire is deficient because you can't use it to charge an electric car. It's a CPU, not a space heater -- how much power it can draw isn't the point, performance is.
Yes, and Intel CPUs achieve significantly higher frequency, and thus per-thread performance, in exchange for that higher power.
With Intel you have the option of running high power/high frequency or lower power/high efficiency. With AMD you don't get the former option due to limitations of the fabrication process used. Somehow this has come to be considered a win for AMD.
> Intel CPUs default to limiting their sustained power draw to exactly their TDP
No, no they don't. That's a motherboard setting not a CPU one, and basically no desktop motherboard at least follows Intel's "recommendation" out of the box.
Yes, they do. The power limits are set in MSRs within the CPU and the CPU has default values for those MSRs.
> basically no desktop motherboard at least follows Intel's "recommendation" out of the box.
Wrong again. Motherboards using chipsets other than the Z series typically do not change the power limits unless the user explicitly sets them. These days even Z series boards do not change the power limits unless the user enables at least one overclocking feature, e.g. XMP. This is how the motherboard manufacturers technically follow Intel's specs while actually running out-of-spec with the settings most enthusiast users use.
I'm pretty sure you've got that exactly reversed, AMD's power draw tends to stay closer to the rated TDP than Intel's.
>>The outrage over Intel CPU's power consumption is pretty silly when you realize that the only reason AMD CPUs don't draw just as much is because their chips would explode if you tried to pump that much power into them. If you care about power consumption just set your power limits as desired and Intel CPUs will deliver perfectly reasonable power efficiency and performance.
I'm not even sure what this means. AMD CPUs are on a more advanced and physically smaller process, with smaller wires, and a different voltage-frequency-response curve. Of course they would "explode" if you try to pump them with voltages that the process isn't designed to operate with, that the Intel CPU with it's larger process can handle. But the power draw isn't really the "point" of the CPU -- performance is.
Imagine thinking that the Pentium 4 or Bulldozer was better than their contemporaries because they were capable of drawing incredible amounts of power.